Hello All
Paul E Condon wrote:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 10:37:09PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
Jerome BENOIT writes:
what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
Whatever you want it to say. On this machine it says "testing/unstable".
--
My test, doing a dist-upgrade on a Sarg
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 01:29:40PM -0600, Paul E Condon wrote:
>
> My test, doing a dist-upgrade on a Sarge system to move it to Etch, showed
> that dist-upgrade does not change the contents of /etc/debian-version.
> Also, the last modified date on /etc/debian-version is jul 26 2004, which
> is th
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 10:37:09PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Jerome BENOIT writes:
> > what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
>
> Whatever you want it to say. On this machine it says "testing/unstable".
> --
My test, doing a dist-upgrade on a Sarge system to move it to Etch,
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:28:34PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 08:53:15PM -0600, Paul E Condon wrote:
> >
> > I just did a dist-upgrade of a spare box from Sarge to Etch. The contents
> > of /etc/debian-version was 3.1 before the dist-upgrade and remain the
> > same
Jerome BENOIT writes:
> what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
Whatever you want it to say. On this machine it says "testing/unstable".
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul E Condon writes:
> Etch, of course, has no version number. So there is no way to test a
> script that has version dependency until it is released into stable.
In order to test your script you can make up a number and put it in there.
The real version number will be assigned and new base-files
David Jardine([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 07:08:33PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
>
> >
> > apt-cache policy base-files
> > base-files:
> > Installed: 3.1.2
> > Candidate: 3.1.2
> > Version Table:
> > 3.1.4 0
> > 300 http://http.us.debian.
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 08:53:15PM -0600, Paul E Condon wrote:
>
> I just did a dist-upgrade of a spare box from Sarge to Etch. The contents
> of /etc/debian-version was 3.1 before the dist-upgrade and remain the
> same afterwards. Etch, of course, has no version number. So there is no
> way to t
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 07:08:33PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
> Jerome BENOIT([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
> > My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
> > which is valid release for Sar
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 10:26:19PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 08:12:46PM -0600, Paul E Condon wrote:
> >
> > It purports to be information that is available to script writers
> > when, if fact, it is not information. It does not, in and of itself,
> > cause a proble
Jerome BENOIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1] what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
I don't think the version number has been decided yet. Probably won't
until Etch gets closer to release
> 2] does it really matter ?
Not really.
--
John L. Fjellstad
web: http://www.fjellsta
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 08:12:46PM -0600, Paul E Condon wrote:
>
> It purports to be information that is available to script writers
> when, if fact, it is not information. It does not, in and of itself,
> cause a problem. It just misleads script writers into believing that
> there is a really si
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 06:45:25PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Paul E Condon wrote:
> > Jochen Schulz wrote:
> > > Jerome BENOIT:
> > > > I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
> > > > My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
> > > > which is valid release for Sar
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 07:08:33PM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote:
>
> apt-cache policy base-files
> base-files:
> Installed: 3.1.2
> Candidate: 3.1.2
> Version Table:
> 3.1.4 0
> 300 http://http.us.debian.org unstable/main Packages
> *** 3.1.2 0
> 500 http://http.us.debian.o
Paul E Condon wrote:
> Jochen Schulz wrote:
> > Jerome BENOIT:
> > > I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
> > > My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
> > > which is valid release for Sarge:
> > > 1] what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
> >
Jerome BENOIT([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
> Hello All,
>
> I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
> My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
> which is valid release for Sarge:
> 1] what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
> 2] do
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 10:26:14PM +0200, Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Jerome BENOIT:
> >
> > I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
> > My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
> > which is valid release for Sarge:
> > 1] what must /etc/debian_version contain for an
Jerome BENOIT:
>
> I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
> My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
> which is valid release for Sarge:
> 1] what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
This is not yet decided, I think. The file is part of the packa
Jerome BENOIT wrote:
Hello All,
I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
which is valid release for Sarge:
1] what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
2] does it really matter ?
If you check out on-going
Hello All,
I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
which is valid release for Sarge:
1] what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
2] does it really matter ?
Thanks in advance,
Jerome
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
20 matches
Mail list logo
